AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Are Optics a must? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 9/4/2010 5:22:47 PM EDT
|
I have been spending countless hours reading reviews on this and that when it comes down to optics.
As an AK shooter, I've come to learn and love the simple and sometimes lacking iron sights. In fact, until I started getting into AK's, I'd never used a red dot sight. Well i picked up a TRS 25 for my 74 and had it on an ultimak, great little combo to get the feel down for a RDS. Fast forward to earlier this week when I got to spend some time shooting two different black rifles, one of which I plan on purchasing in 11 days (come on pay day!). The LWRC had an eotech mounted on it. I enjoyed the reticule; however, the weight and bulk of the sight was a turnoff. I removed the optic and went to the BUIS system. Surprisingly I shot just as well if not better with irons, notably at the 100 yard line. The second rifle, and the one I've been Fapping to, is the Middy spikes carbine. This rifle had a rear magpul BUIS on it. With this combo, I was dancing coke bottles around from 10 yds to 100yds. I find the irons on a AR platform to be superior to that of an AK, as this is well known. –––––––––––––––––––– So, with my past performance using irons, I just realized, do I even need an optic? I'd love to get an aimpoint, etc... but I can't justify the cash for one, when it can go towards ammo. So my choices at present are: - PA micro / riser combo - PA 1-4x24 glass on the extended mount - Vortex Strikefire - Keep the TRS25 and find a riser - Just rock the irons. - If I had a budget optic and needed to use the rifle for SHTF, I'd probably take the optic off and use irons anyways. Do any of you guys prefer the iron sight setup be it GI or BUIS over optics? I'm here to learn, teach me something. |
|
start with irons, once you can hit 200y-300y with irons (or qual the standard military (marines) AR course) then you can add a standard red-dot optic.
remember, adding optics and not knowing how to use your backups well (or at all) is pointless and will eventually get you in a jam. |
|
Just started using a red dot this summer. Aquisition is faster with the red dot, however I get a little sloppy mounting the rifle. My total times run faster with the dot by about 1/2 second. Split times are about
even. I like the red dot for low light, much easier to see. Is it necessary? Not really, though it does make life easier. It doesn't make up for poor fundamentals. |
|
He has obviously mastered the irons already, so the sactimonious statements do nothing to forward the thread.
OP: The reddot transition will take some time to transition to. Ultimate accuracy might not be the goal. Look for speed of target aquisition and ability to acquire the dot with a compromised cheekweld or moving target. You only have one point to align, v. two. Good luck. Corey |
|
The fundamentals / mastery of the irons will be a non issue after my first few outings.
I make it a point to do so on every long arm I own. I'm not qualifying expert marksmen or anything, but can hold my own. I plan on training and attending several classes over the next year or so, and did not know if there would be a noticeable benefit to moving to a RDS / optic setup. (after mastery of irons,etc...) I understand its "faster" but is it really? Thanks for all the input ETA: I should of mentioned I owned a Bushmaster with the standard A2 sight setup for three years, so not completely new to the function / shooting of an AR. BUIS, however, are a new flavor for me. |
|
Quoted:
The fundamentals / mastery of the irons will be a non issue after my first few outings. I make it a point to do so on every long arm I own. I'm not qualifying expert marksmen or anything, but can hold my own. I plan on training and attending several classes over the next year or so, and did not know if there would be a noticeable benefit to moving to a RDS / optic setup. (after mastery of irons,etc...) I understand its "faster" but is it really? Thanks for all the input ETA: I should of mentioned I owned a Bushmaster with the standard A2 sight setup for three years, so not completely new to the function / shooting of an AR. BUIS, however, are a new flavor for me. The farther your targets the greater the disparity in speed between irons and an optic. Same goes for low-light. |
|
Quoted:
Irons are fine for targets with definition. With stock A2 sights, I had no problem connecting with a 6" diameter plate at 220 yards during bright daylight hours. But at twilight? Not a chance, hence the value of a lower power optic. Well put. Come to think of it, I've only really shot during the daytime. 
|
|
Quoted:
Do any of you guys prefer the iron sight setup be it GI or BUIS over optics? I do: A2 sight with N.M. front post. The standard A2 front post is ridiculously wide. I find it easier for me to shoot irons. Though I group all our uppers with 10x or 12x scope to prove <MOA, I prefer iron sights on the AR. The AR was designed as an iron sighted rifle. I find that optics on an AR put my head placement off, and the excessive height over bore exaggerates horizontal POI with the slightest cant. I recently shot 600 yards with iron sights: 139 rounds fired 137 hits on a steel plate. Approximate size of steel plate is slightly wider than a torso and approximately shoulder to belly button high. I got it on video, all 36 minutes and 2.2 GB. As for rapid target engagement, one should be familiar enough with his firearm to hit torso sized targets with a pistol at 25 yards by point shooting (not using sights) and 50 yards with a rifle. This goes back to the basics of knowing and understanding your firearm. Growing up, I shot slingshots and bows without aiming them, and I hit my target. I knew where the rock and arrow would hit before I released. Same thing with firearms, out to certain distances, one should know where the bullet is going to hit. |
|
For me, the red dot on my AK made up for the lack of a decent iron sight system. While functional, they left a lot to be desired. The upgrade here was an easy choice.
Since the AR has superior irons, its almost nice to enjoy them. I'll get to know the rifle's iron setup (std front sight and troy BUIS) and play with my TRS-25 for the time being. If I decide to invest more into the training and use of the rifle, I'll justify the higher price for an optic such as an aimpoint. |
|
Quoted: For me, the red dot on my AK made up for the lack of a decent iron sight system. While functional, they left a lot to be desired. The upgrade here was an easy choice. Since the AR has superior irons, its almost nice to enjoy them. I'll get to know the rifle's iron setup (std front sight and troy BUIS) and play with my TRS-25 for the time being. If I decide to invest more into the training and use of the rifle, I'll justify the higher price for an optic such as an aimpoint. Yes, stock sights on the A2 are pretty good. Even better with a little finer front post and an 0.052" rear aperture. With that and a good target, keeping shots in 1.25 MOA at 100 yards, with a capable rifle/ammo combination. The 0-200 meter aperture on the A2 really helps on the close-in, enabling both eyes to be open. About the only negative on these rifles is the front sight is a bit too close, even more on the M4, hence the need for optics. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
For me, the red dot on my AK made up for the lack of a decent iron sight system. While functional, they left a lot to be desired. The upgrade here was an easy choice. Since the AR has superior irons, its almost nice to enjoy them. I'll get to know the rifle's iron setup (std front sight and troy BUIS) and play with my TRS-25 for the time being. If I decide to invest more into the training and use of the rifle, I'll justify the higher price for an optic such as an aimpoint. Yes, stock sights on the A2 are pretty good. Even better with a little finer front post and an 0.052" rear aperture. With that and a good target, keeping shots in 1.25 MOA at 100 yards, with a capable rifle/ammo combination. The 0-200 meter aperture on the A2 really helps on the close-in, enabling both eyes to be open. About the only negative on these rifles is the front sight is a bit too close, even more on the M4, hence the need for optics. One of the main reasons I am going with the Mid Length, I prefer the longer sight radius. |
|
So lets say I can get a lower priced optic in the interim.
It's probally going to be a PA of some sort, as I want new on the rifle and don't want to use my TRS-25. Thoughts on these three? 1-4x24 scope on extended high mount Microdot and mount M3 Clone |
|
Irons are great if it never gets dark where you are.
"For Darkness Be Thy Ally" Depending on the situation, you're sniper-bait if you're out during the day. 
Some form of RDS is really handy in the urban setting. Possible ingress/egress from structures. The human eye just does not adjust quick enough to some drastic light changes or exposures. The RDS can. I agree...know your irons but I like the versatility/flexibility of an RDS to handle many opportunities. 
|
| My buddy who takes classes all the time will out shoot others who are using eotechs and aimpoints with his irons..but thats in daylight.At night you cant beat an Aimpoint or night vision if you can afford it..so I thing a red dot is necesary just not all the time.Its faster on moving targets for sure but if your getting into gun fights a 15 20 feet day or night its gonna help but not really needed in day time.I use mine as part of my night fighting capability.I will say that when sighting in a red dot do it with both eyes open as thats the real benefit shooting accurately with both eyes open..harder with irons than a red dot except when at close range. |
|
Irons or optics?...Fortunately, for the younger among us, it's still a personal choice. However, for the more 'vintage' shooters among us, an optic is practically a must.
I'm 50 and had Lasik eye surgery about 3 years ago. My distant vision is now fantastic, but my presbyopia (a difficulty in seeing close objects) is absolutely abysmal. I can distinguish NOTHING within 3 feet without reading glasses. Of course, I can wear reading glasses when using my irons, but, depending on the strength of the glasses, either the front or rear sight will be in sharp focus - never both a once - and the target is always a complete blur. Consequently, with or without reading glasses, iron sights on a rifle are quite literally useless to me and I'm certain that my experience is common for many in my age bracket. My preference for optics on my AR's tends towards non-magnified Red Dots or low-magnification scopes. I have 2 ACOG's - a 3X and a 1.5X that I find to be very versatile. I also have a Eotech 512 on my FS2000 that works very well for me - fast and easy. Given the choices above, the variable 1x4 is obviously the most versatile, however the length of the optic doesn't readily lend itself to a 'both-eyes-open' approach. Even at 1X, your non-dominant eye will always see a good bit of that long tube and present a bit of obstruction in your binocular field-of-view. Tough choice between the other 2, but the Gen II micro would be my preference over the M4 clone. It's lighter and smaller. Best wishes. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
RDS allow for shooting with both eyes open, a tactical advantage for closer engagements. I shoot my A2 with both eyes open all of the time. This. Some people do it naturally, others have to focus on it. There's no reason to close one eye when shooting irons, and plenty of reasons to keep them both open. |
|
Ltc Chuck Santose gave me my Best tip here at AR15.com back around 10yrs ago
Add a Aimpoint to my carbine and zero @ the 50Y and use same plane aps! Bought Aimpoint XD with 3moa dot Traded in for the new at the time Aimpoint ML2 in 2001 Im still running the ML2 aimpoint on my LMT M4 Its never caused me any trouble what so ever! Is it a must have? YES for me
1MOA DOT vs 4MOA DOT I SHOOT THE SAME WITH BOTH PERIOD. Warning I have had trouble with IFFY I mean EOTECH BATTERY DRAIN Bought the 551F in 2005 3 times I found this optic dead ! And have seen/read several reports of Eotechs going Dead/crooked mount/falling off. ' I wont use a 3x Magnifier or 1-4x Optics Total waste on a sbr / M4 for my use! I have no need to ID targets at LR Plus the 1-3x optic didnt improve my groups all that much. So yeah Aimpoint & Light & a good sling is a must have for ME |
|
If I remember correctly the new gen PA Micro will mount to any aimpoint micro mount-
So given your ability with your irons you might try the new larue absolute cowitness for the t1 and a PA micro- That way you could work on the speed (and using a RDS in general) while keeping your head at the some position for your irons- and if you need to get a little more precise you can focuse on the irons instead of the dot- And if that set up doesn't work out I don't think you'll have a problem selling a Larue mount on the EE- ETA- the 4oz micro would also be lightweight and small package since the weight of the eotech bothered you- |
|
Quoted:
If I remember correctly the new gen PA Micro will mount to any aimpoint micro mount- So given your ability with your irons you might try the new larue absolute cowitness for the t1 and a PA micro- That way you could work on the speed (and using a RDS in general) while keeping your head at the some position for your irons- and if you need to get a little more precise you can focuse on the irons instead of the dot- And if that set up doesn't work out I don't think you'll have a problem selling a Larue mount on the EE- ETA- the 4oz micro would also be lightweight and small package since the weight of the eotech bothered you- Which LaRue mount do you speak of? This is of great interest |
|
If you're new to and are going to be taking many classes as you have stated, you should get a RDS, and my suggestion is aimpoint T-1 or M series (I have both EO EXPS and aimpoints). Can you run ALL courses with strictly irons? I'm sure it is possible, make sure to give us AAR's.
I like classes where I walk away learning something...but not "I should have came properly equipped". Expensive lesson learned. BTW, I did not vote for any of your choices. |
|
Grab one of the PA micro's and a Daniel defense micro mount and rock that for awhile.
I plan on getting on of the gen7 micros for my 74 build soon (which i know you know about that). That being said I love the side of my Aimpoint ML3 that I have on my AR. I wanted to do another ml3 on my AK, but I can't afford it right now. I really really love the Aimpoint, but in all reality it is probably a waste of cash for us paper shooters. |
|
Quoted: Why not go Aimpoint off the EE? Sure, I have a like new in box Aimpoint M3 4MOA for sale.
Picked up from another dealer about a year ago as new in the box, been sitting in the safe since. Comes with the black rubber cover and all inserts. $475 shipped Or go go to SWFA and get a Sample List one for 419.00 for a AAFES Comp3? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why not go Aimpoint off the EE? Sure, I have a like new in box Aimpoint M3 4MOA for sale. Picked up from another dealer about a year ago as new in the box, been sitting in the safe since.
Comes with the black rubber cover and all inserts.
$475 shipped
Or go go to SWFA and get a Sample List one for 419.00 for a AAFES Comp3?
Or pick up a new one from primary arms for $429
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why not go Aimpoint off the EE? Sure, I have a like new in box Aimpoint M3 4MOA for sale. Picked up from another dealer about a year ago as new in the box, been sitting in the safe since.
Comes with the black rubber cover and all inserts.
$475 shipped
Or go go to SWFA and get a Sample List one for 419.00 for a AAFES Comp3?
Or pick up a new one from primary arms for $429 The M3 is $469. The ML3 is $429. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why not go Aimpoint off the EE? Sure, I have a like new in box Aimpoint M3 4MOA for sale. Picked up from another dealer about a year ago as new in the box, been sitting in the safe since.
Comes with the black rubber cover and all inserts.
$475 shipped
Or go go to SWFA and get a Sample List one for 419.00 for a AAFES Comp3?
Or pick up a new one from primary arms for $429 The M3 is $469. The ML3 is $429. You're right. weaponparts.com has them even cheaper. Anyone know if they are legit? I would never pay more for the M3 anyway. You can use night vision with the ML3 on the lowest setting. |
|
"Of course, I can wear reading glasses when using my irons, but, depending on the strength of the glasses, either the front or rear sight will be in sharp focus - never both a once - and the target is always a complete blur."
You shouldn't focus on the target and you should definitely not focus on the rear sight aperture. Focus on the front sight post. The human eye can't focus on both sights at the same time. You might benefit from the USAMU's presentations on markmanship fundamentals. |
|
Quoted:
"Of course, I can wear reading glasses when using my irons, but, depending on the strength of the glasses, either the front or rear sight will be in sharp focus - never both a once - and the target is always a complete blur." You shouldn't focus on the target and you should definitely not focus on the rear sight aperture. Focus on the front sight post. The human eye can't focus on both sights at the same time. You might benefit from the USAMU's presentations on markmanship fundamentals. May I ask your age? Best regards |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
RDS allow for shooting with both eyes open, a tactical advantage for closer engagements. I shoot my A2 with both eyes open all of the time. This. Some people do it naturally, others have to focus on it. There's no reason to close one eye when shooting irons, and plenty of reasons to keep them both open. I am right handed but left eye dominant. to make matters worse I shoot pistol with my left eye. I have to squint a bit or my sight alignment is shit. Long range I shoot irons. Since my eye cant resolve a reddot very well I use them for short range and low light. my 2cts...... |
|
"May I ask your age?
Best regards" 37, but this isn't a matter of age - I shoot with 70-year-olds. The human eye cannot hold the aperture, front post, and target in focus at the same time. If you are trying to do that, you don't properly understand how to use the iron sights. |
|
Quoted:
"May I ask your age? Best regards" 37, but this isn't a matter of age - I shoot with 70-year-olds. The human eye cannot hold the aperture, front post, and target in focus at the same time. If you are trying to do that, you don't properly understand how to use the iron sights. Thanks for the reply, JCS1. You misunderstood my initial post; easy to do given my wording. I've been shooting for quite some time and regularly compete in the USPSA, so I'm quite familiar with the proper usage of iron sights. It's common knowledge that the human eye can only focus on one object at any given time; in this case, the rear site, front sight or target. I was simply trying to convey that, at age 50, and given the prevalence of presbyopia in that age group, when focusing on the front site using the required reading glasses to achieve that focus, the 'target' then becomes an indistinguishable blur. Without reading glasses, my front sights are a wonderful smudge in triplicate. Let's forget about the rear sights altogether.  Of course, this varies upon the individual. In my particular situation, the Lasik operation made my existing presbyopia exceedingly severe. My condition is actually worse than that of my 82 year old Father. Be that as it may, my situation is no that uncommon.
I greatly enjoyed using iron sights in my younger years, but, subjectively, they've essentially become impossible to use in my current situation. Sad and frustrating. I inquired as to your age to assess if you have any personal experience with this condition. Yes, age does matter, but fortunately, you're presently too young to understand how debilitating presbyopia can be...in all aspects of daily life. Fortunately, modern optics provide shooters like me with some fantastic options. (BTW, apologies to all for the thread drift) Happy shooting. JCS1, feel free thank me for the "too young" remark. I would have loved to have heard "too young" at age 37.
|
|
"It's common knowledge that the human eye can only focus on one object at any given time; in this case, the rear site, front sight or target"
You only need the front sight. I'm 20/400 uncorrected, so I understand many of the vision issues. I had a too-strong vision prescription until recently that was killing my longer distance game. It's just that the statement you posted - as posted - made little sense as you never focus on the rear sight. ". Sad and frustrating. I inquired as to your age to assess if you have any personal experience with this condition. Yes, age does matter, but fortunately, you're presently too young to understand how debilitating presbyopia can be...in all aspects of daily life. Fortunately, modern optics provide shooters like me with some fantastic options. " Have you investigated vision correction beyond reading glasses? "JCS1, feel free thank me for the "too young" remark. I would have loved to have heard "too young" at age 37." LOL. |
|
Quoted:
Optics are not needed. I like shooting my A2 uppers. There is just something about it being so simple I love. Needed for what? What I posted on a similar thread is that I have seen numerous times in fire fights is guys who are damn good shooters in training do allot of shooting and very little hitting. One thing that normally improves the hit to rounds fired ratio, is when the shooter has an optic and is training to use it. People are trying to fight human physiology, when you get startled or fear for your life, you just have a hard time seeing the front sight because the normal reaction is to focus on the threat. At short range it's not a problem; as distance opens up chances of hitting go down significantly. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
"May I ask your age? Best regards" 37, but this isn't a matter of age - I shoot with 70-year-olds. The human eye cannot hold the aperture, front post, and target in focus at the same time. If you are trying to do that, you don't properly understand how to use the iron sights. Thanks for the reply, JCS1. You misunderstood my initial post; easy to do given my wording. I've been shooting for quite some time and regularly compete in the USPSA, so I'm quite familiar with the proper usage of iron sights. It's common knowledge that the human eye can only focus on one object at any given time; in this case, the rear site, front sight or target. I was simply trying to convey that, at age 50, and given the prevalence of presbyopia in that age group, when focusing on the front site using the required reading glasses to achieve that focus, the 'target' then becomes an indistinguishable blur. Without reading glasses, my front sights are a wonderful smudge in triplicate. Let's forget about the rear sights altogether. Of course, this varies upon the individual. In my particular situation, the Lasik operation made my existing presbyopia exceedingly severe. My condition is actually worse than that of my 82 year old Father. Be that as it may, my situation is no that uncommon.
I greatly enjoyed using iron sights in my younger years, but, subjectively, they've essentially become impossible to use in my current situation. Sad and frustrating. I inquired as to your age to assess if you have any personal experience with this condition. Yes, age does matter, but fortunately, you're presently too young to understand how debilitating presbyopia can be...in all aspects of daily life. Fortunately, modern optics provide shooters like me with some fantastic options. (BTW, apologies to all for the thread drift) Happy shooting. JCS1, feel free thank me for the "too young" remark. I would have loved to have heard "too young" at age 37.Well said and I could not agree with you more. I am 57 years old and knows all your trials and tribulations. I shot competitively when I was young and only with iron sights and was in fact the captain of my shooting team, but irons are now pretty much an impossibility for me now for the reasons you mentioned. Sure you are suppose to “only” focus on the front sights, but in real life, the younger shooter can and do in fact snap focus on the target and back to the front sight multiple times during an aiming session to make sure that the target is in fact position perfectly and centered on the front post. If you cannot see the target at all or is just some featureless blob with no clear margin, then no amount of focus on the front post is going to allow you to hit the target - it's as simple as that. Should not take one to be over 50 to figure that one out 
|
|
"Sure you are suppose to “only” focus on the front sights, but in real life, the younger shooter can and do in fact snap focus on the target and back to the front sight multiple times during an aiming session to make sure that the target is in fact position perfectly and centered on the front post. "
Young shooters will do this, but a good coach would tell them they are wrong. "Hard on the sights" means focusing on that front post - not going back and forth. You'll just end up with eyestrain. " If you cannot see the target at all or is just some featureless blob with no clear margin, then no amount of focus on the front post is going to allow you to hit the target - it's as simple as that. Should not take one to be over 50 to figure that one out" If you can't see the target at all, that's one thing. A good sight picture will result in a target with no clear margin, since you, of course, aren't focused on it. I don't have to be 50 to figure out what my coaches have said and what my own experience in highpower have shown me. If you can't focus on the front sight even with correction, then use a scope or a longer sight radius (bloop tube), but jumping back and forth from rear to target to front and back is NOT how the sighting system is meant to be used. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Are Optics a must? (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor